♪ hello and welcome to "kqed newsroom." i'm thuy vu. coming up on our program, we go to the uss hornet to hear from veterans, community leaders and activists at a town hall about the vietnam war. we'll also look at the week's big political developments from sexual harassment allegations against roy moore to president trump's asia trip. but first yesterday the u. house of representatives approved a plan to cut taxes by about $1.5 trillion over ten years. critics contend the gop led bill benefits the wealthy and corporations more than the middle class. meanwhile in the u.s. senate, republicans are trying to shore up support for their plan, which has now cleared the senate finance committee. they've added a clause to repeal the health care mandate under obamacare to help pay for the tax cuts.

joining me now to talk about that and more is congressman ro khanna. he represents the 17th district covering much of silicon valley. congressman, nice to have you here. >> great to be back. >> this week the house passed a gop-led tax reform bill. the senate is now working on its own version. what do you think of republican efforts to change the tax code? >> well, they're basically giving tax cuts to corporations at the expense of middle-class families. that is their priority. they're eliminating deductions for graduate students. they're eliminating deductions for medical expenses. they're eliminating deductions for state or local property taxes to pay for what? to pay for tax cuts for corporations. >> you have proposed your own tax idea. >> right. >> it's a $1 trillion plan, though. what would it do? >> here's the difference. they're theory of the case is you've cut taxes for corporations, and somehow that's going to raise wages or create jobs. my point is if you want to raise

wages, just raise wages. what we ought to be doing is giving the tax credit to working families and the middle class. and you can do that. you can actually have every american making under $75,000 have a 20% pay increase for less cost than the entire republican plan. you give money to people in the middle class and working class. they're going to spend it. they're going to buy products. that's going to create jobs. corporate profits are at a record high. they don't need more tax cuts. >> you won your seat last year by challenging an eight-term incumbent mike honda. now you're voicing concerns about dianne feinstein, basically saying you don't think she should run for re-election. why? >> i didn't say i don't think she should run. i said she should be challenged. everyone has the right to run, and she certainly has the right to make her case. but i think there should be a challenge to her because it's

time for new ideas, and there are things where she has been wrong. >> such as? >> she voted for the war in iraq. she was a strong champion for the patriot act and restricting civil liberties. on fiscal policy, economic policy, she voted for extending the bush tax cuts to the very wealthy. i believe we need a more restrained foreign policy. i believe we need to stand up for civil liberties. i believe we need economic policy geared at the middle class and not just at the investor class. so i think she has done some good things. she's been a lead spokesperson on gun safety. she has delivered for the state of california on getting funding for electrification. but her record, in my view, doesn't reflect california's values. >> but yet, you support and continue to support nancy pelosi. isn't she part of the old guard too? >> but she's been on the right side of history. she opposed the war in iraq unlike dianne feinstein.

she's been a champion for universal health care and led the fight to have the affordable care act. she was one of the most vociferous opponents of bush's tax cuts. so i don't think this is a matter of the time in office. it's a person's values. dianne has been on the wrong side of history on some of the biggest issues of her time. nancy has been on the right side of history. >> your district includes some of the most well known tech companies. you've got apple, intel, tesla. there's a perception that tech companies tend to focus only on issues of concern to them, things like encryption or tax repatriation. what are some of the challenges in getting them to think beyond that? >> that's a great question. i noticed a change. you have google now out in pittsburgh announcing a billion-dollar fund to help people for jobs of the future. i saw tim cook saying that business leaders have a responsibility to care about jobs and to care about

education. and he said that in iowa. and you see oracle creating partnerships with historically black colleges. so i think this election was a wake-up call for the valley. they understand they're part of a larger country. they understand there are many people who feel excluded from this economy. and they want to be part of making sure the prosperity is shared. >> and do you think they get it, companies like facebook, google and twitter, for example, recently testified before congress about how their platforms were used by russians to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. do you think they actually get it, and are you confident that they are willing and able to prevent this from happening again? >> well, i think they understand that these platforms were abused, and the platforms have created a lot of good. they've allowed for dissident voices. they've allowed for barack obama to become president. they allowed for bernie sanders to come out of nowhere. but they've also been abused by

bots that spread misinformation campaigns. they've become channels of hate speech. that hate speech has often been amplified. the question is how do these companies identify these bots. how do they make sure that they prevent misinformation, and that's not an easy issue. but i hope they will work on that. they have to work on that before the 2018 election. >> you are now approaching the end of your freshman year in office. given what you know now, what's the one piece of advice that you wish someone had told you before you took office? >> relationships. the relationships in congress m make a big difference. >> you also said you were surprised by the level of anger at congress. >> i was. i mean i understood that being a challenger, that people were frustrated. but what has been surprising is people have lost their esteem

for congress. they've lost the sense of the nobility of public service. they feel that congress has let them down, that they haven't done anything. we hear all these allegations of sexual harassment and that the same rules don't apply. and i think regardless of party, regardless of geography, those of us who have the privilege of being one of 435 people who are helping shape the laws of this country, we need to do something to re-earn that public trust. that has to be our highest purpose. how do we reclaim the sense that we're working for the people and that we're part of this great deliberative body? >> congressman ro khanna, thank you for coming in and joining us today. >> thank you for having me. continuing with politics, president donald trump returns this week from a tour of asia designed to boost trade and security. he attended an economic summit in vietnam and met with

controversial philippine president duterte to push for trade deals and support in the fight against trim. meanwhile the fallout continues against roy moore, a republican campaigning for an open senate seat in alabama. at least five women have accused moore of sexually harassing or assaulting them when they were teens. to discuss this and more, i'm joined by gop strategist tim miller and amy allison. thank you to you both. >> thanks, thuy. >> roy mar oore, al franken joi the list. this week, bay area congresswoman jackie speier know says she knows of sexual harassment allegations against two incumbents in congress. amy, do you think real change is possible? >> we have to give a shout out to congresswoman speir because she has been a leader on this. remember military sexual assault. she also shared her personal me too story, which takes a lot of

courage for a sitting congress member. and i think we're in an environment where we've hit a tipping point. it's bigger than political party. it's bigger than socioeconomic status or class. it's really we're talking about in a window, and maybe it's a short window where victims have stepped up and they're believed. and i believe that we have enough of a national conversation that she's going to get support on both sides of the aisle. and moore's candidacy and the republicans' response, i think, shows that she's going to get some support from republicans on that bill as well. >> do you agree that the shifting paradigm now means jackie speier's bill has a great shot at pass something. >> i do agree there's a shifting paradigm. i'm not as optimistic that we've gotten to a point where this has gotten beyond party. i think there have been a lot of concerning signs about the tribalistic aspect of this. you're defending those in your own party while casting

aspersions at those in the other party. if you just look at president trump yesterday sent another childish tweet targeting only al franken, right? he hasn't mentioned roy moore. you know, while some democrats have criticized franken, you haven't seen a call for resignation that you might have, i think, if it was a republican in franken's shoes. >> and alabama's gop party splitting with the national republican party on this. they're continuing to back roy moore. >> correct. and i put roy moore in a separate category. these are children. this is child molestation. it's not to, you know, undermine the seriousness of sexual harassment. but, you know, there is some gradeiation here and what roy moore did is so far beyond the pale that you have seen some republicans step out. you have to remember roy moore is not exactly a favorite of my type of establishment republican anyway. you know, he beat luther strange in the primary. so you've seen him get defended more by the conservative sean hannity, steve bannon types. >> it's a moment where politics, though, has to be bigger than party. and we've got to figure out how

to say unequivocally this is okay and this is not okay. you know, i was really reflecting this morning on anita hill. in the early 90s, she had the courage to step up and say clearance thomas sexually harassed me and she was lamba lambasted by democrats and republicans, all white guys, across the board. and the response to that, was to elect the first black woman senator. lots of stuff happened in terms of organizing women. i think we're going to see something similar this time. >> speaking of reflecting, right, another reflection is also happening on the president clinton years. all this talk about sexual harassment, renewing the tension on the alleged sexual misconduct back then. one of his accusers, paula jones, is now saying that she and other women have been, quote, in her words, been screaming for years for someone to pay attention on the liberal side to the claims they've made all these years. does this raise the question there's hypocrisy among democrats? >> i agree with you. there's been a lot of progress on this front if you compare it

to clarence thomas, but there's some areas where you can see these tribalistic political tendencies coming forward. bill clinton is on one of them. it's very convenient that now that the clintons are gone, you finally hear even only a couple liberals saying we should revisit this. i remember in 2015 at the start of the campaign, i was debating a clinton surrogate about this. and i said, people don't realize monica lewinsky was a young woman, and he was the president. and that is totally unacceptable in our morays today, and the clinton machine was outraged that that could be an issue still. >> it should never have been dismissed. it should never have been. but that is the culture and this power dynamic between men and women is something that we have to talk about and face. and the fact that we're actually trying to shine a light, jackie speier's legislation, and we're also having a national conversation about it i think is a first step. i think where we need to go is

to not, in that conversation, because this really is the first time in my memory, in all my years of politics, that victims have actually been believed. so people have a chance from their personal story to actually influence the political environment and say, we need to change the institutions themselves. >> let's move on to taxes. tim, 12 of the 13 republicans who voted against the house tax bill were from new york, new jersey, or california, three states with very high taxes. why did they oppose it? >> well, this is, i would say, the trump revenge against the blue states and against the never-trump republicans because this tax bill, while, you know, largely is a tax cut for the vast, vast majority of people in the country, the people who are punished are those who live in high-tax states and high-tax cities because they get rid of the deduction that currently those taxpayers can take outside of their taxes. so you'll see people here in san francisco and in new york city see their taxes go up, upper middle class people. >> look at the scale because i

think the california -- there's only three of our california republicans that voted against the legislation and for good reason. because california has the highest amount of income that this state and local deductions protects. $101 billion. so people who are used to getting a deduction or a check at the end of the year, they're not going to see that money if this goes through. the second place is new york, but by half. so california, this is really a legislation that would punish california residents. >> briefly in defense, their argument would be this is a better system going forward, and there's going to be short-term issues for certain people in the tax code. that's going to happen in any change of the tax code. but this is a bad incentive to give a deduction to encourage states to increase taxes. so overrule, it would be better to have a system that doesn't encourage high taxes. >> you know what i would love? i would love for the seven congressional seats that are up in 2018, that are sitting on top

of districts that voted for clinton, for that to become a major campaign issue. let's see if people want to give up their state and local tax deduction in those districts, and then that could let us know a lot. >> the senate is hoping to have a vote on this when it comes back from thanksgiving. but i want to also touch on president trump's asia trip. president trump says it was a tremendously successful trip. true? >> well, he thinks everything that he does is a tremendous success. it's fabulous. >> he also drinks water very well from a bottle. >> you know, look, i think i'm very harsh on the president and because he asks for it. i think there's a little bit of a remains to be seen on this tour, right? will china do anything to increase pressure on north korea like trump claims they will? you know, will there be new trade negotiations with south korea? maybe. there hasn't been a lot of follow-through. so what we do know from the trip is he made a stupid, childish tweet at the north korean dictator, and he sucked up to two leaders, the chinese and the

leader of the philippine who both have serious human rights abuses, and he did not say a single thing to stand up to them. that's extremely concerning. >> what a difference a year makes. it couldn't be more stark in terms of the representation of our country to the rest of the world, and that trip just shows that trump's an embarrassment to our country. >> we will have to leave it there. tim miller and amy alison, thank you both. >> thank you. and now on to a historical chapter that still divides the nation. this fall, ken burns documentary series about the vietnam war premiered nationally on pbs. kqed recently hosted a town hall meeting on the uss hornet in alameda to reflect on the c conflict that claimed at least a million lives in vietnam. during the vietnam war, multiple search and rescue missions were launched from the flight decks of the hornet. today it's a museum and many vietnam veterans work as docents

there. on the hornet, we heard from veterans and activists about how the vietnam war affected the hearts and minds of those who lived through that era. >> i flew the f-8 crusader. it's a supersonic fighter aircraft. we were carrier-based. i flew off the ticonderoga. ships just like the hornet that we're on here now. i had 362 combat missions and 474 carrier landings in my career. >> i'm here today. i'm not really sure. you know, i've never really had closure with the war. you know, i've never been sorry that i served. i've always been proud of my service, but it's always there. it's always something that's in the back of my mind. >> at the town hall, we had several speakers. michael blecher served in vietnam in the infantry and is now the executive director of swords to plow shares. it's a san francisco based

nonprofit that connects veterans to services and job training. we also heard from keith armstrong, a psychiatrist for the veterans administration who specializes in treating ptsd. >> welcome to you both. thank you for being here. [ applause ] keith, what are some basic lessons that you have learned while working with suprevietnam veterans? >> i started at the v.a. in 1985, and by 1989, the v.a., in its infinite wisdom, decided they should do something for vietnam veterans who were suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. it took them way too long to do something. >> we really had to suffer through this almost decade of neglect that happened from, i would say, from 1974 to 1984, that period of time, where there was very little help for veterans. there was no program. there was no such thing as ptsd. there was no recognition of

agent orange exposure. there was nobody anxious to hire veterans. it was really a bad time, and that was a crucial decade. by the mid-'80s, almost a third of those who were homeless on the street were veterans even though they're barely 11% of the population. a third were homeless. so that sort of woke us up a little bit. >> do you think the v.a. has -- how would you rank their performance and the way they treat vietnam veterans? >> early on, the v.a. did a horrible misservice to vietnam veterans. i think things are way better now. we've developed a bunch of new treatmen treatments for things like prolonged exposure, and cognitive processing therapies, which are helpful. i think that the most component of providing services is creating a safe and secure

environment for people's stories to be heard. >> a lot of terrible suffering was at war, and that's what we know. that doesn't go away. i wish i could make that go away, and it hasn't, right? it's still there. and we still have a lot of work to do. >> ptsd tends to be a waxing and waning condition, and with really, really good support, you can manage it, and you can do well. and i think that's especially true for people who have experienced a great deal of trauma, a lot of combat. >> i see there are a lot of people here who want to talk to you. so let's go ahead and go to the audience. >> i'm bob swanson. vietnam veteran. i was in 1965. i was aboard the uss bennington, headed to vietnam. what is it going to take to get the v.a. to recognize medical cannabis as a legitimate help aid for our veterans coming back with ptsd? thank you. >> i have a lot of patients over

the years that have used marijuana to help with symptom relief, to help go to sleep, to decrease nightmares. i think that really what it will take are more and better randomized controlled trials. and if we have good science, then i think you'll see more and more people in the medical community advocating for marijuana to be used. but we need the science. >> all right, michael blecher and keith armstrong. thank you both for being here tonight. [ applause ] for our next segment, we are going to focus on the period of anti-war activism, and we have a couple of wonderful panelists to introduce you to. first is eva jefferson patterson, patterson is the president and a co-founder of the equal justice society. eva, come up. [ applause ]

and our second guest for this segment is will kirkland. he is a united states naval academy graduate, class of 1965, who became an anti-war activist and a union organizer with the united farm workers. will kirkland. [ applause ] welcome to you both. how are you connected to the military, eva? >> well, thank you for having me here, and it's nice to see the veterans. my dad was in the air force, and he served in vietnam from '66 to '67. he was in camron bay, and when he came back, he said we shouldn't be in vietnam. we're ruining the culture. we should not be there. that not withstanding, i entered northwestern in 1967 completely supporting the war. >> and, will, for you, did you serve in vietnam as well? >> i did.

i was, as you said, class of 1965, united states naval academy, son of class of 1943 united states naval academy, brother 1969 united states naval academy. so i was up at yankee station. i was one of the youngest officers of the deck. machines all over. loud noises. all that was amazing, but when i saw the fighter attack planes take off from the decks of the carriers, all i could imagine was what those bombs were doing. >> so you thought it was immoral, that the killing was immoral? >> i'm not sure if it was moral or immoral. i was extremely uneasy about my participation in doing something that i felt was wrong. and as a result of that, my parents and i didn't speak for seven years.

navy veterans. son in the military. >> will, you opposed the war from the beginning. eva, you supported it initially. what was the turning point for you? >> it was gradual, and over time i saw that nixon had a chance to b bring the war to an end, and he didn't because he wanted to win the election. there are all kinds of points when our politicians could have stopped it and saved people from being killed, and they didn't. >> so when you decided to oppose the war, what did you both hope your opposition to the vietnam war would accomplish? >> we hoped it would stop the war. and i'm looking at the veterans, and i'm thinking about all of you who were doing your duty, but we were lied to. and so we saw napalm. we saw body bags, and we wanted to stop it. we drew on the notion of the abolitionists during slavery times who stood up and said, no,

no, no, no, no. and ultimately as a result of the civil war, things stopped. >> we get set on these paths which at the end the bombs start falling. how do we move out of that? what other means are there to solve our problems? and mine was kind of ghandi and non-violence. not to be a pacifist but to figure out ways to say this is important to me. i know this is important to you. what do we do now? >> my name is arnold dos santos. i grew up in alameda. with regards to vietnam, i was honored to serve my country on behalf of the south vietnamese people, and i lost a lot of friends over there. and i'm going to tell you the south vietnamese people fought valiantly. they had a cause. you may couch it in the terms of

maybe our own civil war where you thought that was somewhat justified. well, in a sense, vietnam was a civil war between the communists in the north and the south vietnamese who were looking for liberty and democracy. >> will, eva? >> first of all -- and i don't mean this to sound hokie or like it's b.s., but thank you for your service. i guess i don't have a simplistic answer. but where i was standing at the time, it looked like our leaders were lying to us. so maybe there's just a difference of opinion, and the whole purpose of today is to listen. i'm going to think about what you said. i hope you'll think about what i said. >> thank you. thank you for sharing your story. [ applause ] eva patterson and will kirkland, thank you both. [ applause ] >> on behalf of the uss hornet and on behalf of kqed, thank you all for being here. [ applause ]

and that will do it for us. for more of our coverage, go to kqed.org/newsroom. i'm thuy vu. thank you for joining us. ♪

>> house republicans pass a sweeping overhaul, but at what cost? i'm robert costa. we take you inside the tax debate. plus democratic senator al franken faces an ethics investigation, and allegations continue to pile up against republican senate contender roy moore. tonight on "washington week." >> this is about giving hardworking taxpayers bigger paycheck, more take-home pay. this is about giving families who are struggling, peace of mind. robert: the house passes a $1.5 trillion tax cut package, scoring a momentary victory for president trump. >> thank you, it's going really well. robert: but the path ahead in the senate is more complicated as gmples o.p. lawmakers add the repeefl the federal insurance mandate. at least one republican says he's opposed. >> i'm not for the current version.